Capon Valley Coalition

The Dominion Post ran this story on May 4, showing consistent, widespread opposition to TrAIL wherever it would run and not benefit the communities it trashes.

May 04, 2008 (The Dominion Post - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) — – Allegheny Energy has said the Trans Allegheny Interstate Line project will be good for West Virginia and is a necessary part of the nation’s electricity grid.

llen Staggers, an Allegheny spokesman, said the company has a legal responsibility to maintain reliability and deliver electricity to its customers. Infrastructure additions, such as the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line project, are part of that obligation.

Under the leadership of President Don Corwin and Vice President John Balasko, the Halleck Community Association has brought attention to Allegheny Energy’s proposed 240-mile, 500-kilovolt power line that could cross six West Virginia counties if approved by the state’s Public Service Commission.

“Don and John work tirelessly researching the issues and educating themselves in order to bring information to the public about Allegheny Energy’s plans,” said Edie Jett, a member of the Halleck Community Association. “Without their dedication, the project would have steamrolled through Monongalia County without any resistance.”

The Laurel Run Watershed Community Association has worked closely with Corwin and Balasko to oppose the power line project.

“Don and John have certainly been very diligent and worked very hard for the folks over there in the Halleck community,” said Lew McDaniel, spokesman for Laurel Run.

If approved by the PSC, the project would start in Pennsylvania, pass through West Virginia and continue to northern Virginia.

“This power line project is the first of many more to come,” Corwin said. “West Virginians must stand up to protect their own interests and ensure that we, not the corporate executives, benefit from any exploitation of our resources.”

Jim Kotcon, a spokesman for the Sierra Club, had high praise for Corwin and Balasko.

“Both of those gentlemen have made significant contributions to saving Allegheny’s ratepayers money and for protecting the quality of life in Monongalia County,” he said.

Corwin and Balasko have tried to convince federal and state officials to oppose the project, with some success.

They’re “raising the awareness of this issue among the public and elected officials by making it clear that this power line project is a bad deal for West Virginia,” Corwin said.

Staggers said the need for the TrAIL facilities is driven by load growth in the Mid-Atlantic and Northern Virginia areas of PJM, as well as the southwestern Pennsylvania portion of Allegheny Power’s zone, including the everexpanding Pittsburgh suburbs.

Staggers said the benefits to the West Virginia economy also include an estimated 700 jobs during the construction phase (2007-11). There is also the potential that more coal used in power plants will come from West Virginia.

The Halleck Community Association remains unconvinced.

“We are of course hopeful that the commissioners will conclude that there are viable alternatives to TrAIL and deny TrAILCo a certificate that grants eminent domain,” Balasko said, “but should they decide to approve its construction, our options will be to request a rehearing and to appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court.

The Hampshire Review reported in its May 21 issue:

ROMNEY — Evidently, Allegheny Energy does not want to pay Hampshire County building permit fees for the massive power line towers that could be constructed in the county as part of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line (TrAIL) high-voltage power line project.

Allegheny Energy recently informed the county planning office the company has never been required to pay building permit fees for power line towers.

Hampshire County Commission President Donald P. Cookman said he wants Allegheny Energy to show good cause why they shouldn’t pay the building permit fees.

Cookman said Allegheny Energy needs to document some type of “legal authority” to show why they believe they don’t have to pay the fee.

Commissioner Steve Slonaker highlighted what he observed as the irony of Allegheny Energy’s position.

Slonaker said the property owners in the county who face the prospect of having the Allegheny Energy towers constructed on their property have to pay building permit fees if they undertake any new construction on their property.

“So, why should the power company put a tower on that Hampshire County property owner’s land and not have to get a building permit and pay the fee,” Slonaker said.

Get the complete story in this week’s Review!

From The Hampshire Review in Romney, WV, on Wednesday, May 07, 2008:

By MARLA PISCIOTTA
Review Staff

ROMNEY — Hampshire County commissioners said they were against rescinding their opposition to TrAIL, a proposed power line running across Hampshire County near Rio and Yellow Spring.

The commission received a letter from Allegheny Power, the company spearheading the power line, asking it to recend the resolution, which objected to the line.

During the regular commission meeting Tuesday, county residents Bill Goleman, Grady Bradfield, who is a former county commissioner, Robert Paul and Clyde DeWitt expressed their displeasures with Allegheny Power and the proposed project.

Commissioner Robert Hott said he also received a letter opposing the power line from Yellow Spring resident Ralph Wojtowicz.

The proposed electrical power line project would cut a 240-mile path through West Virginia, Virginia and Pennsylvania.

Commissioner Steve Slonaker said regardless of the recent “changes” in Allegheny Power’s recent plans, he still opposes the project.

“Once the line goes across your land, it’s there forever,” said Slonaker.

Slonaker said for the past 44 years a power line has gone across his property.

“The power company has made lots of money in the past 44 years off that line. I have not benefited,” said Slonaker.

Get the complete story in this week’s Review!

From the Charleston Gazette April 24:

PSC sets hearing on power line settlement

The state Public Service Commission has scheduled a hearing for late May to discuss a major settlement of part of the case over the $1.3 billion Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line, or TrAIL.

Commissioners set the hearing for 9:30 a.m. May 27 at PSC headquarters in downtown Charleston.

The PSC will hear testimony and allow questioning concerning the settlement between power line developers Allegheny Energy and the commission staff and consumer advocate.

In a Thursday order, the PSC also formally delayed its deadline for making a decision on the transmission line until Aug. 2 to consider the settlement.

MAJOR NEWS! Spread the word.

And ask yourself, what happens after seven years? (Maryland had rate increases deferred for a number of years, and last year, consumers got clobbered!)

The Charleston Gazette reported today:

The state Public Service Commission wants to delay its decision on a $1.3 billion power line across northern West Virginia until early August.

Commissioners want more time to review a settlement that resolved opposition from the PSC’s staff and consumer advocate division.

The PSC wants to allow other parties to comment on the deal, and time to hold a hearing for testimony and arguments over the settlement’s impact on the case.

Originally, the PSC was required by state law to give Allegheny a decision by May 2.

Last week, Allegheny lawyers said that the power company would voluntarily give up the right to a decision by then. Company lawyers proposed that the PSC study the settlement for 30 days, and issue a ruling by June 2.

The PSC responded that “it is apparent” that the 30 days would not be enough time for other parties to comment on the deal or for the commission to consider it.

Allegheny is seeking PSC approval to build its proposed Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line, or TrAIL. The 500-kilovolt line would carry electricity from southwestern Pennsylvania through West Virginia and into northern Virginia.

Power company officials say that the line is needed to provide cheap and reliable power to big Eastern cities and their growing suburbs. But the project has drawn intense opposition from hundreds of West Virginians, who fear it will mar scenic views, lower their properly values and continue what they say is an environmentally damaging reliance on coal-fired power.

As originally proposed, the West Virginia portion of the transmission line would run about 114 miles through six counties. It would enter the state north of Morgantown, and run south and east through Monongalia, Preston and Tucker counties to a substation near Mount Storm in Grant County. Then, it would extend for 47 miles through Grant and Hardy counties and into Hampshire County, before entering Virginia near Capon Springs.

Under last week’s deal, Allegheny agreed to use an alternate route proposed by the consumer advocate. Instead of cutting across southern Monongalia and Preston counties - where opposition has been the most organized - the line would go more directly south, before cutting east and following existing transmission lines from Pruntytown to Mount Storm.

Allegheny also promised to move a transmission operations center to West Virginia and save state customers more than $40 million in industry rate reductions, low-income assistance and conservation plans, and deferments of rate hikes to fund transmission line construction.

The announced settlement prompted a letter to the PSC renewing the West Virginia Coal Association’s support for the power line.

“Additional transmission lines will add hundreds of construction jobs, hundreds of permanent jobs, preserve the long-term viability of WV coal-fired power plants and add the transmission capacity needed to potentially construct new coal plants right here in West Virginia,” wrote association President Bill Raney.

“Projects such as TrAIL are important to the future of West Virginia coal and to our state as we secure a place for coal-fired electric generation in the national energy market.”